One report concludes that many schools do not have,

[RonPurewal]

(1)
hi ron sorry to bump this old thread again
er, I remember that the same pronoun (such as they them their) in a sentence always points to the same antecedent.
therefore in choice D, it is unaccepable that them and they refer to different antecedent.
Am I wrong?

you already know the answer to "am i wrong?", since you're looking at the official answer.

here, we're dealing with two pronouns in two different clauses-- effectively two different sentences-- so this is a non-issue.

also, "pronoun ambiguity" is NEVER tested on this exam.
as long as a pronoun refers to something that is actually a noun and that matches it in terms of singular/plural... the pronoun is fine.

[RonPurewal]

why is
"schools do not have many computers, nor do they need many" right
and
" schools do not have many computers, nor are likely to have" wrong
and
"schools neither have many computers, nor are likely to have" right?

the answer here isn't much better than "that's just how 'nor' works".

basically, it can do one of two things:

1/ by itself, it can link a negative sentence to another negative (as in your first sentence here). in this case, the first sentence is a normal sentence that expresses a negative; in the second sentence there's an inversion of the subject and helping verb (here, "do" and "they").

2/ "neither ... nor ..." can link parallel structures.

[AllenY389]

Thanks

[AllenY389]

why is
"schools do not have many computers, nor do they need many" right
and
" schools do not have many computers, nor are likely to have" wrong
and
"schools neither have many computers, nor are likely to have" right?

the answer here isn't much better than "that's just how 'nor' works".

basically, it can do one of two things:

1/ by itself, it can link a negative sentence to another negative (as in your first sentence here). in this case, the first sentence is a normal sentence that expresses a negative; in the second sentence there's an inversion of the subject and helping verb (here, "do" and "they").

2/ "neither ... nor ..." can link parallel structures.

so，"nor are likely to have" is not a complete sentence here，thus wrong？

[RonPurewal]

correct.
if the thing following "nor" is just a verb (nor are...), then you'd need "neither [verb] nor [verb]".

[gmatkiller_24]

sorry for bumping this old thread... i pick up the correct choice, but still get some problem for C.

"or are likely to have" will be interpreted as " or (they) are likely to have", which is contradictory from the former part " many schools do not have"（that is the reason when I eliminate C）


but here is the problem, can “not” from former part " many schools do not have" be understandable in the latter part “ or are （not）likely to have”？

[RonPurewal]

but here is the problem, can “not” from former part " many schools do not have" be understandable in the latter part “ or are （not）likely to have”？

no.

you can have "do(es) not __ or __" ... but the __'s must individually be things that make sense with "do(es) not".

e.g.,
If Tom does not walk or run, he will gain weight.
(notice that "walk" and "run" are not verbs by themselves; the verbs would be Tom walks and Tom runs. these forms have helping verbs, as in the case of could run, will run, etc.)

you can't say "do not are...", so, nope.

[gmatkiller_24]

I see what you mean. Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

you're welcome.

[LizaZ934]

Hi Ron
I chose B
Since "Nor" is a coordinating conjunctions, I think here is the ellipsis of Subject and Predicate, the sentence could be
"One report concludes that many schools do not have, nor (do they) likely to have, enough computers to use them effectively."
why it is wrong? thanks!

[RonPurewal]

Since "Nor" is a coordinating conjunctions, I think here is the ellipsis of Subject and Predicate

i have no idea what these terms mean (any of them).

...but there's no need to get so fancy.
it's wrong to write that someone 'does likely' to have something, so it's also wrong to write 'nor do they likely...'.

[ShubhamG503]

Hello Ron
You mentioned above that

you should just consider this an idiomatic construction: nor + helping verb + subject.

nor + noun + helping verb is never an acceptable construction. never, ever

That just holds if nor is used alone in sentence to confirm?

Also I have general question for neither/nor construction.
Lot of SC Options will say
1.have neither XYZ nor have ABC
2. have neither XYZ nor ABC
3. neither have XYZ nor ABC
4. neither have XYZ nor have ABC

Lets assume XYZ and ABC are parallel
Can I safely say that 2 and 4 both are correct ? Is there any rule I can adopt for either/or, both/and.

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

yes, #2 and #4 are both fine. that's just normal parallelism.

[thanghnvn]

I miss this one.
how C is wrong is most difficult.
we can say
we do not drink or eat because "do not" can apply to "drink" and "eat"

but we can not say
we do not have or are like to have
because
we do not have or do not are likely to have
is wrong

in d , nor can begin a new clause provided that the previous clause is negative clause

[tim]

I did not see a question mark in your post. Please let us know if there is a question we need to address.